Thursday, April 15, 2010

As the May 10 elections near the failure of elections anxiety grows even stronger. This fear acquires special significance because for the first time in Philippine history the elections will be automated - at least on a nationwide basis, since we already had a taste of computerized polls during the ARMM elections. In this coming elections, however, the stakes are high as all positions, from president down to the councilor of the smallest municipality, will be voted for.

Failure of elections is not something new in our electoral lexicon. Losing candidates have at various times in the past utilized this as a legal tool to annul the proclamation of their rivals. More often than not, however, this legal argument has been met with disapprobation from the Supreme Court. The High Court has sustained this claim only in the clearest cases of electoral frauds.

Section 6 of the Omnibus Election Code identifies the instances under which the Commission on Elections (Comelec) can declare a failure of elections, which the Supreme Court in Soliva v. Comelec, G.R. No. 141723 (April 20, 2001)has enumerated in the following manner:

Section 6 of the Omnibus Election Code contemplates three instances when the COMELEC may declare a failure of election and call for the holding of a special election. First, when the election in any polling place has not been held on the date fixed on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud or other analogous cases. Second, when the election in any polling place had been suspended before the hour fixed by law for the closing of the voting. And third, after the voting and during the preparation and the transmission of the election returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election results in a failure to elect.

In the context of automated polls, many fear failure of elections with computers breaking down or not transmitting election results. The glitches experienced in the recent absentee voting in Hong Kong have only served to heighten this fear. In Roque v. Comelec, however, the Supreme Court dismissed this fear in denying the petition to declare the automation illegal. The Supreme Court said the automation law provides manual voting as a contingency measure in the event computers break down. The problem with this, however, is that if manual voting is resorted to in case of computer glitches, elections in affected precincts may take unusually longer and pass the closing of voting, especially so that precincts are now clustered with registered voters numbering as many as 1,000 in a precinct. Many voters will end up not being able to cast their votes.

Another scenario is the ever-looming threat of electoral fraud. Opponents of automation claim the resurgence of Garci-type cheating, wherein Comelec insiders will rig the PCOS machines by configuring them to make the favored candidates win. Inquirer columnist Amando Doronilla, however, refuses to accept this possibility in his February 16 article Who Will be the Evil Genius? According to him, there is none among the current presidential candidates (except perhaps Gilbert Teodoro via Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo) who is in a position of authority to direct the manipulation by Comelec. Teodoro and Comelec chair Jose Melo, he says, would not do it. Doronilla argues that President Macapagal-Arroyo has clearly no need for this to further her congressional bid, considering her almost guaranteed victory among her town mates.

If elections fail - because of massive cheating or breakdown of voting machines or both - and the problem is not resolved before the term of office of the president and her constitutional successors ends on June 30, there would clearly be no one legally authorized to lead the country after this date. Since GMA would be the last person to hold the reins of power before the crisis begins, I would suppose she would stay at the helm in the mentime. Now, whether or not she will do so for good remains to be seen.

Although most GMA critics would conclude that she will take this opportunity to remain in power for good, I humbly believe otherwise. If GMA were to perpetuate herself in power she would certainly meet stiff opposition both domestically and internationally, not least of which is the US. With all the military exercises the US has been conducting in the Philippines and the millions of dollars it pours into them, the Philippines is still much within the radar of US global interests. With all its worries on terrorism, the need to check an ever expanding China, and an adventurous North Korea, the last thing the US needs is a failed or weakened Philippine state.

On the local front, a permanent GMA tenancy in Malacañang would elicit thunderous protests from the opposition and civil society groups. Coups are not farfetched. In short what will happen will be nothing short of a civil unrest; even worse, an uprising that could throw the whole country into a bloody revolution. This very gruesome scenario is something that will make Washington even more vigilant in preventing a Marcosian reprise by GMA. With all her faults, I don't think GMA is ready to take this dangerous path.

GMA can, however, do one last thing that will mark her legacy. She could remain in power - a sort of hold-over president - in the event of a failed election. But in doing so, she must assure the public that it will only be temporary until the elections are re-held and completed. By law, the Comelec is mandated to re-hold elections in the event of failure at the first instance. This would entail huge expense and effort, but this is the only way that chaos can be averted.

The alternative of her not staying and vacating office when no successor has been proclaimed and sworn would be more dangerous. Power grabbers from all stripes will try to outdo each other to succeed in power. There can be no illusion that this will happen peacefully. To be sure it will be a violent race to the top. On the other hand, if GMA were to hold-over, it will simply be a case of status quo. What will save the day is the assurance that she will give to the public that she will only be doing so to pave the way for a smooth transition of power.

6 comments:

"If GMA were to perpetuate herself in power she would certainly meet stiff opposition both domestically and internationally, not least of which is the US. With all the military exercises the US has been conducting in the Philippines and the millions of dollars it pours into them, the Philippines is still much within the radar of US global interests. With all its worries on terrorism, the need to check an ever expanding China, and an adventurous North Korea, the last thing the US needs is a failed or weakened Philippine state."

Agree.

America is busy on the Pacific front and the last thing they need in that part of the world is a politically volatile Philippines that might explode.

Incidentally, it is worth noting that America's funding of their exercises and military "bases" is not matched by the enormous influence we allow them to exercise in RP and this includes the military installations we allow them to set up in violation of the Constitution. For all that, they pour into RP a measly 30 to 33 million dollars -- and to think we got to beg for them, which is a drop in the bucket if you compare that to the more than 3 billion dollars and 2.5 billion dollars they pour into Israel and Egypt respectively.

Going back to Gloria: Like you, I don't believe she will want to entrench herself in Malacanang after the elections or after the new president is elected. Power greedy that she is, she realises that the Speaker's gavel will be a great cover against those who hold the ambition of seeing her behind bars. She's not exactly a dumb broad.

However, I believe she is prepared to mess up the system (government) as badly as she can before she steps dowb if she thinks the new president will not offer a conciliatory hand.

The US will only promote US interests and a failed Philippine state is of no consequence. People forget that the US was one of the sponsors of the failed BangsaMoro juridical entity which the Supreme court threw out. The US doesn't care about the Philippines- it only cares about controlling Mindanao which is an important buffer state for them against radical Jemaa Islamiya, protecting the Malaccan trade routes for oil and keeping a foothold in China's neighborhood.. Nothing more.. It is up to the Philippine citizens to capture the Arroyo family and hold a public execution to star the cleansing process. IF a civil war ensues then so be it..This country needs an enema and it starts with the execution of those who raped the public coffers...

@ Anna - Yes, we've been getting a raw deal from the US for a long time already; our sofas and former bases agreements are a far cry from those of other countries, like Japan, in terms of advantages and treatment of the Philippines as an equal sovereign.

GMA is a flagitious, cunning political operator. In terms of messing up the system, she has been floating trial balloons like what she has recently done on the cha-cha affair. Expect more to come.

@ Anonymous - US interests will precisely be compromised if the Philippines ends up as a failed state. It is exactly US interest that will drive US intervention to prevent the Philippines from falling into the precipice. The US does not want an out of control Philippines or else its operations there will be compromised; it's an inconvenience it does not want.

Ok Jun- I respect your opinion but don't you think you are likewise guilty of the "little brown brother syndrome"? where we have this romantic almost zealous awe of uncle Sam that we inflate the US's view of the Philippines.. If we were so important how come we get paid a pittance while Egypt, Turkey and even pakistan rake it in.. Okok even if GMA is contemptible (more so than the late Benazir Bhutto?) our leaders are are always treated like trash whenever our top officials visit.. there is a lot of historic evidence on how the US treats the Filipinos with condescending contempt and the eager beaver little brown brothers wag their tails and do loop the loops to get the attention of the ugly Americans.. We should wake up to the twilight of Pax Americana and welcome with open arms the rise of the dragon -Pax China!

If you have read my last comment to Anne's comment, I clearly said that we have always been getting a raw deal from the US, that it is not treating us as an equal sovereign as shown by our Status of Forces Agreement and the bases agreement, compared to other countries like Japan. We are not actually debating the shabby treatment we, as a nation, have been getting from the US. My point is, you said the US does not care about a failed Philippine state, and I say it does. The reason: its interests in the Philippines will be affected, not necessarily because the US is genuinely concerned for our welfare.